The new anti-Americanism
26/9/12 16:42![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
htpcl.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsAaalright then, my fellow shameless procrastinatorz busy folks. Everybody seems to be eager to jump on the "OMG Muslim protests" bandwagon... so where without me? Eeeh?
You thought LJ is the hub of e-douchebaggery, didn't you? Well, you're lucky you can't read the Bulgarian forums on the Webz! You'd need a bucket for all the puke. See, in principle, spending more than a few minutes daily around the BG forums is considered dangerous for the psychic health, the Association of Butthurt Bloggers has announced. And it's true, I'm telling ya! Really, take Google translator and go to any (and I mean any!) piece of online news there, and do the stupid mistake to check the comments below the articles. After reading a few tons of all that crap, you'd surely need some intense soul cleansing. Maybe black-metal, yoga, reading Pratchett, or something more extreme.
Indeed, the BG web space, as any other web space, is an endless source of insight on society: exactly how far aggression can stretch, how much the process of becoming a bunch of brute cynics has progressed around these frequencies, how deep dehumanization has set in, things like that. And anonymity, not Red Bull, really gives wings!
After the end of communism, where anonymity was being encouraged on a state level by stimulating and even rewarding the mutual act of getting thy buddy in hot water by reporting all their transgressions to Dear Leaders, the Bulgarian Anonymous Scribbler(TM) has now found the perfect outlet for their e-awesomeness inside the muddy waters of the Internetz. And if a shrink ever tries to dig real deep in the maze of the human subconscious (and render unto Caesar), I hereby invite'm to delve into the dark damp place that's the BG forum. Here's just a glimpse. And I wish you good luck! (Oh, and don't forget the bucket).
Latest example: the reactions to the assassination of the US ambassador in Libya. Don't even know his name. No one here does. But the news about his sudden demise was met with undisguised jubilation around our forums. Some giggled, others snickered, a third part of them gloated, and still others were tossing sarcastic remarks that the Department of State has a nice new graveyard in D.C. where their employee can rot now. I'm not going to pour the whole pile of shit here.
What does this reaction say about us at a human level, first of all? Cuz that's what matters to me primarily: the elementary, human level. Those are people who died there, right? So, can death be a reason for jubilation and Schadenfreude? Isn't the loss of human life, any life, supposed to be a tragedy? Well, turns out there are some dangerous tendencies toward dehumanization in our society, and unless things are changed soon and we return to some most basic ethical norms, then human life would ultimately lose most of its value for us. The signs are clear: the death of innocent people becoming a source for ridicule. OK, maybe not for all, but for a worryingly rapidly increasing part of us.
Secondly, these reactions are happening in a country that's supposed to be a US ally, where the "values of enlightenment, humanism and democracy" are supposed to have been setting root in the last couple of decades - or at least to be respected somewhat when they suit our interests. Moreover, it's a country where a terrorist attack happened just a couple months ago, where innocent people died - most of them Israelis, plus a local bus driver. It was just some guy who was a father, who had a wife and children, and whose only fault was that he showed up at the wrong place at the wrong time.
Yeah, those are the real victims of terrorism - potentially, every one of us. The atrocity in Burgas however doesn't seem to have helped for the maturing of the Bulgarian e-scribbler even one bit. That weird species would still inhabit the darkest corners of the Web, hiding behind their convenient anonymity and rejoicing at the death of a diplomat in Benghazi who had nothing to do with anything. He paid with his life for someone else uploading some stupid shit on the Internet thousands of miles away. Someone much like those e-scribblers, I'd wager. What's the connection between that diplomat and the e-troll, and why did the former have to pay with his life for the latter's douchebaggery? The e-scribblers don't seem to care. I wonder what would've happened if, say, a Bulgarian had uploaded such a video and those offended issued a fatwa for his beheading. Hmmm? No doubt they'd play Internet Tough Guy behind their keyboards.
Of course, the nationality of the victim does matter too. He was American, and an American diplomat at that. And here we're reaching the core of this ulcer in our brains: a new type of anti-Americanism that's beginning to show its face around these latitudes, and most pronounced in the anonymous e-places. It's exactly there where self-appointed expert historians never fail to remind us of the "barbaric" bombings of Sofia during WW2. An act done by the Americans and the British while we were rounding up Jews in neighboring countries and handing them over to Germany, in exchange for a bargain that later allowed us to boast that we had been one of the only 2 countries in Europe to save all its Jews from the Holocaust. And of course they're completely leaving out of the context such interesting questions like why D-Day was necessary, who opened the 2nd front, who defeated fascism and swept it out of our country, and why the Americans and British were giving their lives for the liberation of Europe from the German boot.
Paradoxically, this new type of East European anti-Americanism, like many other East European (or Balkan, or just Bulgarian) things, is in stark contrast with the general tendencies in Europe. As soon as Obama entered the White House (or even before that), the rampant anti-American moods in Europe instantly subsided considerably, because they had mostly been a result of GWB's diplomatic isolationism mixed with the preemptive strike doctrine that caused so many ills around the Middle East. Huge crowds greeted Obama in Berlin, and the majority of Germans, Austrians, Czechs and Poles and other folks around the Old Continent now still largely sympathize with America much more than they did 4 years ago. Not sure why exactly, but Obama's magic seems to have worked its spells at this side of the Big Water somehow. He was even given a Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing but being nicer than Bush. And on the upside, that's a capital that's worth being used for doing something useful. Even the criticism against the anti-missile shield in Central Europe, and the secret CIA prisons in East Europe, and all the rest didn't muddy this pinky picture.
So we're reaching the question if the new BG/Balkan anti-Americanism (at least as far as e-space is concerned) is genuine, or it's being sponsored by someone with an agenda? And, isn't it strange that at a time when thousands of BG students are studying around the US universities or have already graduated there and have made a good life in the Land of the Free, the death of a US diplomat is a source of gleeful cheers? Something that we wouldn't afford ourselves even in communist times, when America was officially The Enemy? There was at least respect between the two sides back then.
We should be pretty naive to believe that the otherwise short-memoried Balkanites have suddenly become so enamored with history, and they remember the Sofia bombings that happened 70 years ago in the tiniest detail. Just an example: my grandma's family was directly affected by one of the heaviest US/UK bombardments during WW2, their residence block was leveled to the ground and they spent weeks living in the basement near the Alexander Nevsky Cathedral in Sofia... But not even once have I heard anyone from my kin talking ill of either Americans or the British.
So the question is, who's seeding these anti-American moods around the public? Does it have something to do with the whole saga about the construction of a second nuclear power plant that has become a topic of contention between Russia, the US and our government, and is related to the country's attempts to restore its role of an energy hub on the Balkans, and all the big external interests that come with that? Or is it because of the (now former) US ambassador here and his active role as a lobbyist on behalf of multinational corporations like Monsanto and their attempts to make inroads into EU territory via the back-door that are such impoverished EU-members like Bulgaria and Romania (and his insistence that GMOs should be allowed on EU territory)? Or the initial US desire to put parts of its anti-missile shield system on the BG shores?
All of these are tricky questions that concern all our society. And meanwhile, journalists seem to be too preoccupied with other diversions, rather than asking the really important questions: what's happening to our society? And is it just ours, or there's something bigger happening here?
You thought LJ is the hub of e-douchebaggery, didn't you? Well, you're lucky you can't read the Bulgarian forums on the Webz! You'd need a bucket for all the puke. See, in principle, spending more than a few minutes daily around the BG forums is considered dangerous for the psychic health, the Association of Butthurt Bloggers has announced. And it's true, I'm telling ya! Really, take Google translator and go to any (and I mean any!) piece of online news there, and do the stupid mistake to check the comments below the articles. After reading a few tons of all that crap, you'd surely need some intense soul cleansing. Maybe black-metal, yoga, reading Pratchett, or something more extreme.
Indeed, the BG web space, as any other web space, is an endless source of insight on society: exactly how far aggression can stretch, how much the process of becoming a bunch of brute cynics has progressed around these frequencies, how deep dehumanization has set in, things like that. And anonymity, not Red Bull, really gives wings!
After the end of communism, where anonymity was being encouraged on a state level by stimulating and even rewarding the mutual act of getting thy buddy in hot water by reporting all their transgressions to Dear Leaders, the Bulgarian Anonymous Scribbler(TM) has now found the perfect outlet for their e-awesomeness inside the muddy waters of the Internetz. And if a shrink ever tries to dig real deep in the maze of the human subconscious (
Latest example: the reactions to the assassination of the US ambassador in Libya. Don't even know his name. No one here does. But the news about his sudden demise was met with undisguised jubilation around our forums. Some giggled, others snickered, a third part of them gloated, and still others were tossing sarcastic remarks that the Department of State has a nice new graveyard in D.C. where their employee can rot now. I'm not going to pour the whole pile of shit here.
What does this reaction say about us at a human level, first of all? Cuz that's what matters to me primarily: the elementary, human level. Those are people who died there, right? So, can death be a reason for jubilation and Schadenfreude? Isn't the loss of human life, any life, supposed to be a tragedy? Well, turns out there are some dangerous tendencies toward dehumanization in our society, and unless things are changed soon and we return to some most basic ethical norms, then human life would ultimately lose most of its value for us. The signs are clear: the death of innocent people becoming a source for ridicule. OK, maybe not for all, but for a worryingly rapidly increasing part of us.
Secondly, these reactions are happening in a country that's supposed to be a US ally, where the "values of enlightenment, humanism and democracy" are supposed to have been setting root in the last couple of decades - or at least to be respected somewhat when they suit our interests. Moreover, it's a country where a terrorist attack happened just a couple months ago, where innocent people died - most of them Israelis, plus a local bus driver. It was just some guy who was a father, who had a wife and children, and whose only fault was that he showed up at the wrong place at the wrong time.
Yeah, those are the real victims of terrorism - potentially, every one of us. The atrocity in Burgas however doesn't seem to have helped for the maturing of the Bulgarian e-scribbler even one bit. That weird species would still inhabit the darkest corners of the Web, hiding behind their convenient anonymity and rejoicing at the death of a diplomat in Benghazi who had nothing to do with anything. He paid with his life for someone else uploading some stupid shit on the Internet thousands of miles away. Someone much like those e-scribblers, I'd wager. What's the connection between that diplomat and the e-troll, and why did the former have to pay with his life for the latter's douchebaggery? The e-scribblers don't seem to care. I wonder what would've happened if, say, a Bulgarian had uploaded such a video and those offended issued a fatwa for his beheading. Hmmm? No doubt they'd play Internet Tough Guy behind their keyboards.
Of course, the nationality of the victim does matter too. He was American, and an American diplomat at that. And here we're reaching the core of this ulcer in our brains: a new type of anti-Americanism that's beginning to show its face around these latitudes, and most pronounced in the anonymous e-places. It's exactly there where self-appointed expert historians never fail to remind us of the "barbaric" bombings of Sofia during WW2. An act done by the Americans and the British while we were rounding up Jews in neighboring countries and handing them over to Germany, in exchange for a bargain that later allowed us to boast that we had been one of the only 2 countries in Europe to save all its Jews from the Holocaust. And of course they're completely leaving out of the context such interesting questions like why D-Day was necessary, who opened the 2nd front, who defeated fascism and swept it out of our country, and why the Americans and British were giving their lives for the liberation of Europe from the German boot.
Paradoxically, this new type of East European anti-Americanism, like many other East European (or Balkan, or just Bulgarian) things, is in stark contrast with the general tendencies in Europe. As soon as Obama entered the White House (or even before that), the rampant anti-American moods in Europe instantly subsided considerably, because they had mostly been a result of GWB's diplomatic isolationism mixed with the preemptive strike doctrine that caused so many ills around the Middle East. Huge crowds greeted Obama in Berlin, and the majority of Germans, Austrians, Czechs and Poles and other folks around the Old Continent now still largely sympathize with America much more than they did 4 years ago. Not sure why exactly, but Obama's magic seems to have worked its spells at this side of the Big Water somehow. He was even given a Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing but being nicer than Bush. And on the upside, that's a capital that's worth being used for doing something useful. Even the criticism against the anti-missile shield in Central Europe, and the secret CIA prisons in East Europe, and all the rest didn't muddy this pinky picture.
So we're reaching the question if the new BG/Balkan anti-Americanism (at least as far as e-space is concerned) is genuine, or it's being sponsored by someone with an agenda? And, isn't it strange that at a time when thousands of BG students are studying around the US universities or have already graduated there and have made a good life in the Land of the Free, the death of a US diplomat is a source of gleeful cheers? Something that we wouldn't afford ourselves even in communist times, when America was officially The Enemy? There was at least respect between the two sides back then.
We should be pretty naive to believe that the otherwise short-memoried Balkanites have suddenly become so enamored with history, and they remember the Sofia bombings that happened 70 years ago in the tiniest detail. Just an example: my grandma's family was directly affected by one of the heaviest US/UK bombardments during WW2, their residence block was leveled to the ground and they spent weeks living in the basement near the Alexander Nevsky Cathedral in Sofia... But not even once have I heard anyone from my kin talking ill of either Americans or the British.
So the question is, who's seeding these anti-American moods around the public? Does it have something to do with the whole saga about the construction of a second nuclear power plant that has become a topic of contention between Russia, the US and our government, and is related to the country's attempts to restore its role of an energy hub on the Balkans, and all the big external interests that come with that? Or is it because of the (now former) US ambassador here and his active role as a lobbyist on behalf of multinational corporations like Monsanto and their attempts to make inroads into EU territory via the back-door that are such impoverished EU-members like Bulgaria and Romania (and his insistence that GMOs should be allowed on EU territory)? Or the initial US desire to put parts of its anti-missile shield system on the BG shores?
All of these are tricky questions that concern all our society. And meanwhile, journalists seem to be too preoccupied with other diversions, rather than asking the really important questions: what's happening to our society? And is it just ours, or there's something bigger happening here?
(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 13:57 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 14:01 (UTC)"U commie!"
"U fascist!"
Etc.
(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 14:15 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 14:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 14:39 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 14:40 (UTC)Also, the most frequent argument on the BG webz is: "Who's paying you to type this? Confess!"
That includes fishing, too. And don't get me started on football. :-S
(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 14:03 (UTC)You might be on to something there.
(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 15:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 16:07 (UTC)Claim: "Barack Obama began his presidency "with an apology tour.""
PolitiFact's vertict: Pants on Fire (patently false) (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/31/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-said-barack-obama-began-his-presidency/).
Details:
Romney said Obama began his presidency "with an apology tour."
But a review of Obama’s foreign travels and remarks during his early presidency showed no evidence to support such a blunt and disparaging claim. (In later years, we found two formal apologies, but they were not at the start of his presidency and not part of a tour.)
While Obama's speeches contained some criticisms of past U.S. actions, he typically combined those passages with praise for the United States and its ideals, and he frequently mentioned how other countries had erred as well. We found not a single, full-throated apology in the bunch.
Calling those remarks "an apology tour" is a ridiculous charge. So we rate his statement Pants on Fire.
More about this phenomenon of fact-checking in a few minutes.
(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 20:23 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 07:19 (UTC)That's quite a novel idea! :-)
(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 17:24 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 16:48 (UTC)Is Bulgaria really an ally of the US? That is not an enviable place to be.
(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 17:13 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 20:13 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 20:15 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 20:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 20:57 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/9/12 23:40 (UTC)A former ambassador is now a lobbyist? The US government has no control over what someone does once they stop working from the government.
Sounds like people just jumping on anything negative related to the US for a chance to crow to me.
(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 06:30 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 07:12 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 07:24 (UTC)WikiLeaks: US Embassy in Sofia Backed Pro-GMO Lobby
> According to the cables, GMO supporters in Bulgaria are actively backed and financed by the American Embassy
He was lobbying on behalf of Chevron, who were pushing real hard for the lifting of the ban on fracking.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-19/bulgaria-bans-gas-fracking-thwarting-chevron-drilling-plan.html
Etc.
(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 13:06 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 13:13 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 13:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 15:01 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 15:13 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 15:20 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 16:01 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 17:20 (UTC)Instead of self-identifying with the U.S. above or against the rest of the world ('we'll do what we want, because they don't/won't like us' anyway), try empathising with the rest of humanity. It is in part this chauvinism & antipathy towards the rest of humanity which has radicalised so many people against U.S. imperialism, although this is not the same as hating all U.S. citizens.
(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 17:56 (UTC)We do, that is our policy.
rather than just accepting collateral damage in, say, the Arab/Muslim world, i.e. civilian deaths caused by the U.S. military, as bad public relations (bad for the U.S.) - this is dehumanisation.
War and military actions always have civilian casualties. It is the US policy to minimize them. War is also dehumanizing, no matter who is involved.
Instead of self-identifying with the U.S. above or against the rest of the world ('we'll do what we want, because they don't/won't like us' anyway),
There is nothing that the US can do that will satisfy everyone. It is simply impossible. That being said, we should focus on our best interests and part of our best interest is a stable world. Often that involves non-interference.
try empathising with the rest of humanity.
Are you trying to say that we don't? Where is your proof?
It is in part this chauvinism & antipathy towards the rest of humanity which has radicalised so many people against U.S. imperialism, although this is not the same as hating all U.S. citizens.
My point is, that no matter what we do, people will accuse us of imperialism, even though, apparently, most people don't even know what that means. We have spent billions overseas on the rights of women, free speech, democracy, free trade and commercial investment, often against our own economic interest. For that we are called imperialist and evil.
So why don't you tell me what specific things the US could do to make the world better that we aren't already doing.
(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 18:38 (UTC)Your 'point' was that the U.S. 'might as well do what we damn well please'. In your opinion, it pleases the U.S. most to uphold human rights, but the U.S. is called imperialist & evil because it assassinates democratically-elected leaders & supports dictators abroad in the name of 'stability', e.g. replacing Allende with Pinochet in 73 for ideological reasons (of course, this stability does not extend to the real lives of the citizens of those nations suffering under dictatorship), as well as dictating their economic policies in the interests of U.S. big business, even when it undermines those peoples' human rights, quality of life & standards of living. It is one rule for U.S. citizens & another for U.S. subjects abroad, e.g. labourers forced to work for minimal pay & in terrible conditions that would both be illegal in the U.S, for the profit of U.S. business/government.
When is spending billions overseas on 'free trade' & commercial investment ever against the economic interests of the U.S.? Can you think of even one historical example?
Why, in your opinion, do so many people have a less than favourable view of the U.S. in the world?
(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 19:43 (UTC)That's kind of a reach based on a few statements and not true regarding me.
Your 'point' was that the U.S. 'might as well do what we damn well please'. In your opinion, it pleases the U.S. most to uphold human rights,
My statement was rather nuanced. I did not say we *should* do what we please, I said we *might as well*. That is a big difference.
but the U.S. is called imperialist & evil because it assassinates democratically-elected leaders & supports dictators abroad in the name of 'stability', e.g. replacing Allende with Pinochet in 73 for ideological reasons
Since 1976 it has been the policy of the US NOT to assassinate leaders of officially recognized countries. If over 35 years of not doing this isn't enough, then how long should it take?
as well as dictating their economic policies in the interests of U.S. big business, even when it undermines those peoples' human rights, quality of life & standards of living.
News flash. Most all large corporations are now multi-national. Should we blame the BP Gulf oil spill on British Imperialism?
It is one rule for U.S. citizens & another for U.S. subjects abroad, e.g. labourers forced to work for minimal pay & in terrible conditions that would both be illegal in the U.S, for the profit of U.S. business/government.
And the US isn't the only one benefiting. Everyone who buys these products worldwide is contributing. You own an iphone, you're guilty, you buy a sweater, you're guilty. Business profits made in foreign countries do not benefit the US because they aren't taxed, and take away US jobs. The only thing the US can do about a multi-national company operating in a soverign nation is either urge people not to buy the products or place a tariff on them. Of course, if we imposed a tariff we would be accused of imperialism.
When is spending billions overseas on 'free trade' & commercial investment ever against the economic interests of the U.S.? Can you think of even one historical example?
Increased trade deficit, loss of jobs, loss of tax revenue.
Why, in your opinion, do so many people have a less than favourable view of the U.S. in the world?
Partly from ignorance, misinformation from local politicians, bigotry, stupidity, cultural relativism ie, the same things that form American views. Partly ideological, there are many nations that don't value western values particularly the values we inherited from the western European enlightenment and put into practice. Partly because it gets attention to provoke the big guy ie, someone who accuses the US of anything bad gets a certain level of support whereas someone accusing say, Belgium of doing something bad gets largely ignored. It's kind of like criticizing Walmart as opposed to a mom-and-pop shop.
I find it ironic that someone from the UK feels compelled to accuse the US of imperialism given your own rather dubious history with the practice. Do people still hold a less than favorable view of the UK because of your overt imperialist track record?
(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 20:21 (UTC)I find it ironic that someone from the UK feels compelled to accuse the US of imperialism given your own rather dubious history with the practice. Do people still hold a less than favorable view of the UK because of your overt imperialist track record?
You are wrong to find it ironic - the difference is that I am not compelled to defend U.K. imperialism, & yes, of course people still hold a less than favourable view of the U.K., because of its overt imperialist track record & ongoing support for U.S. imperialism. It is clear in this relationship, however, who is the superpower & who is the satellite state. I am not denying my country's dubious practices past or present for 1 second, whereas you are.
Since 1976 it has been the policy of the US NOT to assassinate leaders of officially recognized countries. If over 35 years of not doing this isn't enough, then how long should it take?
The C.I.A. would disagree with you, although maybe not officially.
Business profits made in foreign countries do not benefit the US
With all due respect, LOL. The U.S. is not a benevolent society - it gives to take.
What do you understand by the term 'imperialism'? <- I hope that this does not seem patronising, as it was not intended to be, but it can be difficult to convey tone when one is reduced to text on a screen, comrade.
(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 23:08 (UTC)With all due respect, LOL. The U.S. is not a benevolent society - it gives to take.
Do you know anything at all about business? You make it sound like the US government and multi-national corporations are the same.
The C.I.A. would disagree with you, although maybe not officially.
So you have information regarding this, or just rumors. That's right you know because everyone "knows" but often what everyone knows just ain't so.
What do you understand by the term 'imperialism'?
Extending authority over foreign countries, usually but not always by acquiring and holding colonies by force.
So if you believe, without proof, that the CIA is involved in assassinations, and multi-national corporations conspire with the US government, I have a website for you: http://www.wanttoknow.info/conspiracytheories
(no subject)
Date: 27/9/12 23:44 (UTC)Yeah, I know a thing or 2 about business, but what we are really talking about fundamentally is global capitalism, globalisation & the U.S.'s dominant & disproportionate cultural & economic influence within it. I dare not mention the military-industrial complex, in case I get accused of being a conspiracy theorist - oh wait.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist - are you aware of the U.S.'s involvement in Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Venezuela etc, to name just a few countries, since 1976, not to mention Iraq & Afghanistan or Iran? Of course, I cannot prove conclusively that the C.I.A. has made attempts on Hugo Chávez's life, but you mentioned 1976, so let me stay in the mid-70's to late-80's. If you would like to try to deny the U.S.'s support of death squads & dictators in Latin America's dirty wars & the mujahideen against the U.S.S.R., for example, then be my guest. The C.I.A. even gave Iran lists of left-wingers to encourage mass executions of socialists, way back when it wasn't a part of the Axis of Evil.
From wiki: 'Imperialism, as defined by the Dictionary of Human Geography, is "the creation &/or maintenance of an unequal economic, cultural, & territorial relationship, usually between states & often in the form of an empire, based on domination and subordination." Imperialism, as described by that work is primarily a Western undertaking that employs "expansionist, mercantilist policies"'.
& if you really believe everything that you claim about the U.S. then you must really be a happy guy. Congratulations.
(no subject)
Date: 28/9/12 14:28 (UTC)Our economy is suffering from competition not only from cheap labor but also from increased infrastructure and capability in foreign countries largely promoted by the US since the fifties. We are a victim of our own success.
(no subject)
Date: 28/9/12 01:43 (UTC)